Pushing the "anything can happen in 100 at-bats" mantra aside for a second.....

Well, it looks like Paul Depodesta might be on to something with this performance analysis stuff, huh?

IN
J.D. Drew (95 AB): .263/.405/.442
Hee Seop Choi (73 AB): .273/.361/.548

OUT
Adrian Beltre (117 AB): .222/.246/.308
Shawn Green (113 AB): .274/.339/.442

Not to mention, Jeff Kent is batting .333/.444/.637 in 102 at-bats, Brad Penny is back and has a 3.27 ERA in 11 innings so far, Derek Lowe has a 1.96 ERA in 41 1/3 innings, and, oh yeah, they saved a couple of bucks.

I guess my question here is: Why the hell is the LA Times so bent on bashing the Dodgers? Even when they win, the game story is written with a sarcastic "Wow, what a surprise" angle.

I'm not suggesting the Times' Dodger coverage should be more "Let's Go Dodgers," but a little less "Fu** the Dodgers" is in order.

If Depodesta's acquisitions keep these performances up until June, there's absolutely no reason why the Times shouldn't begin writing apology columns about him, admitting that they were wrong, he was right; that he's smarter than they are; and that, hey, maybe this kid might actually know something about running a baseball franchise.

The chances of that happening are as likely as T.J. Simers admitting he's wrong, but at the very least, a Times story under the headline, "Drew beating the crap out of Beltre," or more realistically, "Depodesta's plan panning out" should be on tap within the next couple of weeks. If it isn't, I've gotta believe the Times writers aren't doing their jobs; they're letting their bias get in the way of reporting what's really happening.